I was up there on Sunday and the work does look pretty rubbish at the moment, however I think the vegetation should encroach back onto the track and a few years down the line it might not look too bad providing the 4x4s are kept off.

> (In reply to UKC News)
>
> I was up there on Sunday and the work does look pretty rubbish at the moment, however I think the vegetation should encroach back onto the track and a few years down the line it might not look too bad providing the 4x4s are kept off.
>
> Alan

Could the mountain bikers agree to stay on the outside to facilitate this?

Oddly it sounds like the mountain bikers want it left in its degraded state as it is a 'good' ride. If they don't do something it will become one huge water-worn scar. Apparently the revetments have already started to collapse due to water penetrating the surface so I guess they have to do something.

> (In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH)
> Has the whole track been surfaced to this extent ?
>
> The bit shown in the picture has been pretty smooth for some time, but it's the bit higher up - and very close to climbs like Central Butress - that is most concerning.

Well there were piles of dirt on the track on Sunday on the section a little way down from the Causeway Slabs so it was work-in-progress. The section under the Causeway slabs had not been touched yet.

In reply to UKC News: I think all the talk of banning 4x4s is massively out of order.

The national parks are there for all to enjoy. The relatively small amount of "green lanes" allowing motorised traffic may erode quickly, but it stops larger amounts of illegal offroading spreading this erosion and damage over a wider area.

I for one, if they do carry this all the way up to the crag, shall be driving up it to make the walk in shorter than it already is!

> (In reply to UKC News)
>
> Oddly it sounds like the mountain bikers want it left in its degraded state as it is a 'good' ride. If they don't do something it will become one huge water-worn scar. Apparently the revetments have already started to collapse due to water penetrating the surface so I guess they have to do something.
>

Here's my problem - I don't like it the way it is - too many big unstable blocks - but I don't want to see it turned into a road.

We all know it needs work - the wall is collapsing, the surface is unstable - but surely before they do any work they need to decide who will use it. Hard to fathom why they have started this work when they undertook a consultation process in Novemeber and have yet to reach a decision on this. If is going to surfaced to the extent shown in the picture then it may not appeal to 4x4s or to most MTBs, but you may find a further increase in trail bikes and the dangers of walkers getting strafed by stones as they speed past.

But what's most concerning is that major work is being undertaken on such an iconic landmark as Stanage without any consultation or even warning. There isn't even anything on the PDNPA news pagehttp://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/news

> But what's most concerning is that major work is being undertaken on such an iconic landmark as Stanage without any consultation or even warning. There isn't even anything on the PDNPA news page
> http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/news
>
> It makes you wonder if the PDNPA even know what's going on ?

From the article:
According to Ride Sheffield, the County Council has been prompted to undertake this work under threat of legal action from a member of 4◊4 campaign group LARA, who wanted the byway brought up to the required 'safe' standard.

aounds as if the off road crowd have forced them into this, so they've taken the cheapest quickest option to avoid legal costs

> (In reply to UKC News)
>
> Oddly it sounds like the mountain bikers want it left in its degraded state as it is a 'good' ride. If they don't do something it will become one huge water-worn scar. Apparently the revetments have already started to collapse due to water penetrating the surface so I guess they have to do something.
>
>
> Chris

The mountain biking fraternity (and I bike myself) are becoming more of a problem to the enviroment than the 4x4's ever were. Every little path/trod/sensititively negotiated access path are covered in mountain bike ruts. Its no longer a minority but a sizeable proportion who don't give a crap where they go.

> >>
> [...]
> From the article:
> According to Ride Sheffield, the County Council has been prompted to undertake this work under threat of legal action from a member of 4◊4 campaign group LARA, who wanted the byway brought up to the required 'safe' standard.
>

In reply to UKC News: maybe the US way could be the way forward.only pedestrian access and permits to pay for paths to be maintained to minnimize pedestrian and cyclist impacts, but that just woildnt be English to pay to use a deteriorating resource such as our limited countryside.

... Trouble is brewing in the Peak District over some new work on the Stanage Causeway track

Shit the bed... there is trouble a brewing as well as some furore ??

...best get the pitch forks & flaming torches out to chase those responsible for a poorly written and irresponsible report... does the author know anything about the asset review of Stanage?

Nod to the cheeky mountain bikers Chris & Horscroft - well done on moaning again about not being able to crash & break your legs - your not getting any younger chaps, however there are a few tree's to crash into at the plantation if you want the gory glory!

In reply to UKC News: Mountain bikers, just like rock climbers want interesting and challenging routes. These are in limited supply and the continued sanitisation of bridleways is seen as a very negative trend. Surely as climbers you can appreciate that challenging terrain has intrinsic value?

In reply to cheese@4p: Putting aside the fact this isn't a bridleway, why should rights of way be maintained in such as way as to make them "interesting and challenging" for mountain bikers? And challenging for which mountain bikers? Jared Rando or Fred who likes to pootle round fireroads?

"Evil 4x4 drivers sticking to one of the few remaining legal byways, evil MTBers having fun in the countryside and wind/rain erosion wear out road surface prompting repairs."
and
"How bad is the polish at crag X?"

In reply to Sir Chasm: You seem to be advocating reducing everything to the lowest/easiest/most accessible state. Should all rock routes be seen in that way? Of course not, their difficulty is not managed.

In reply to UKC News: Personally I think this looks better than the churned up, oily scar that was there before. Once the greenery comes back and softens the edges it'll probably look quite in keeping with the landscape.

In reply to Mr. K: Happily, within 5 years it will have eroded back to what it was before (a challenging ROUTE for mountain bikes, motos and 4x4s of which there are precious few). Ultimately money wasted.

I have driven the route in a Land Rover and it was challenging. I've also driven many routes that are in similar condition to the newly resurfaced route and enjoyed those.

Mountain bikers have trail centers for dedicated, challenging routes. 4x4 drivers have pay and play sites to use for challenges. Public rights of way aren't meant to be used in such a way (although because of the state of them I accept that they do become challenging)

Public rights of way SHOULD be maintained by the council.

The problem with Stanage, and many, many other routes is not overuse by bikers and 4x4's. It's lack of maintenance in the first place.

Had the causeway been maintained properly, as a right of way, it would not have reached the state that it was is in. I think that's why the off-road community put such a case forward for it (and others) to be resurfaced.

Just like footpaths to crags need maintenance/clearing, and bridleways need hedge rows cutting back and maintaining, so do RUPPs, BOATS, and other rights of way.

Don't blame decades of neglect by councils/park authorities on the users.

In reply to Sir Chasm: I think should have been left as an evolving, challenging, route because there are plenty of miles of easy roads and lanes with smooth surfaces and little or no technical challenge for those who want to pootle on them. The more difficult sections are getting fewer and fewer due to trail sanitisation. This is happening throughout Yorkshire and the Peaks.If you are a climber do you not seek to challenge your abilities by pushing through the grades? If so you will understand. To cleanly ride up a technical trail can be very much like success on a difficult climb to which you have aspired. It can be very saddening to turn up to a hill that you have been trying to ride cleanly for years to find that it has been homogenised.

In reply to cheese@4p: I can understand why, on a selfish level, you might want your challenge to remain, but it isn't a mountain bike route, it's a right of way. It didn't start out challenging did it? Pack horses weren't going up those bedrock steps (which you were never going to clean, you went round them) so which arbitrary level of difficulty would you choose? And would you have left the revetments to collapse to add to the challenge?

In reply to Sir Chasm: How do you know how it started out? Was it always a Right Of Way? Which arbitrary bit of cliff do you choose to climb up? Or do you just drive to the top? You have also somehow analysed my riding ability and motivation and found it wanting, well done Sir. Revetments? Have they always been there?

>
> Nod to the cheeky mountain bikers Chris & Horscroft - well done on moaning again about not being able to crash & break your legs - your not getting any younger chaps, however there are a few tree's to crash into at the plantation if you want the gory glory!

Howdy Simon. Heard you've not been well recently, hope you've recovered but you are sounding a bit feverish

If you re-read my post you'll see that, from an MTB view, I have mixed feelings about this route, whilst a hardcore rider like John will probably be happier flying through the plantation anyway. But as a walker, climber and environmentalist I object to this urbanisation of the countryside, and about something which may well increase both the volume and speed of motorised vehicles through it.

However the main concern here is that DCC has undertaken major construction work on something as beautiful and iconic as Stanage without any consultation, warning or explaination. The fact that there is nothing on the PDNPA new page http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/news is very odd, as there is a warning about work on the Monsal Trail.

Does the PDNPA know what DCC is up to ?
Does DCC know what it's contractor are up to ?
How can anyone who cares about Stanage not be concerned about this ?
And what does any of this have to do with Peak Asset Review ?

As a guess, I'd say it started out as a means of transport between Sheffield and Hathersage which eventually warranted a dressed stone surface and at some point was adopted by the council as a road.

The reason for the furore is that people are forgetting it's a road. The council has a duty to maintain it. After years of neglect and deterioration it has finally received maintenance. This is dissapointing for those who enjoyed the challenge, but that's just tough, go and ride on a nice bridleway, there are plenty of challenging ones. (general comment btw, not specifically aimed at Mr Cheese)

In more urban areas a road that is full of potholes would be in the newspaper as the subject of local shock and anger. If the council is responsible then it has the right to go and deal with it.

A number of people have thrown in the "no consultation grrr argh!" line. Could I ask - why do you think you are entitled to consultation for the council to fix something they are responsible for and which is a right of way for vehicles?

Of course, in my view, the only reason there is a fuss is that a number of interested parties have a desire to see a right of way for vehicles left in a terrible state because it is a great recreational challenge. I don't believe we should allow one or two groups of people with a specific interest to allow something to become impassable to other vehicles and users just for their weekend fun.

In reply to Rampikino:
In Italy there is a area of Liguria called the Cinque Terra, 5 villages perched on cliff tops overlooking the sea, largely inaccessible by car but connected by a stunning footpath, the most dramatic and beautiful section of it being known as Via Dell'Amore - the lover's walk. So popular was this walk that repair work became neccessary

In reply to Jimbo C: OK, so at some point it can be designated as not a road if a road is not needed. Recreational facilities are needed, including crags of course. Or are we really so hidebound by the neccesities of previous centuries?

A gross exaggeration in comparison to what I'm seeing on the Causeway. But if that's your approach then fair enough.

Not all improvements or repairs to "traditional" paths have been for the worst. Just look at the slabs by the parking in Stanage (popular end) - stopped a big swampy walk in and have had limited negative impact.

You can pick examples to fit your argument, but when it comes to it you have to look at them on a case-by-case basis.

> (In reply to Rampikino)
> It's an example of the danger of applying a urban solution inappropriately

Exactly. I recall walking from Redmires, along the Packhorse 'road' over Stanage Pole and down the Causeway in the 1960s. Up to Stanage Edge, the 'road' was a line of stone slabs, never more than 2 feet wide.
OK? The 'road' was 2 feet wide. It was a Packhorse Road. A 'road' built for pack horses. not for any wheeled vehicle.
Down the causeway it was a stony track, about 6 feet wide at the time, but I'm certain that it too was once a 2 foot wide line of slabs.

For hundreds of years it was never thought necessary for any wheeled vehicle to use the 'road', obviously because it wasn't a road in the modern sense of the word. It was also rarely necessary in those hundreds of years to maintain the road. It could stand up to the wear imposed by horses and human feet. A great design.

Somewhere along the line, and I don't think this was until the late 1980s, someone decided to try and get a 4x4 up the path, given that there was yielding vegetation, grass, heather etc. either side. They succeeded. I remember the horror I felt when I first saw the vegetation churned up either side of the slabs. At its worst point, around 4 years ago, I measured the churned up mud as being 22 metres wide. This because when the ruts got too deep, the vehicles forced another road to the side. Then another.

Somehow, the fact that the law defined it as a 'road' and a right of way, all laws pertaining to any road was applied, including it seems, the right for 4x4 vehicles to widen the 'road'. No council or authority widened the road, the users did.

I see no reason now why 4x4 vehicles will not one day be driving all the way along the top of Stanage. I have seen a vehicle attempt to cut across from the Stanage Pole towards the Popular End. One day someone will succeed. How about a road all the way along the top of Froggatt and Curbar?

>
> Exactly. I recall walking from Redmires, along the Packhorse 'road' over Stanage Pole and down the Causeway in the 1960s. Up to Stanage Edge, the 'road' was a line of stone slabs, never more than 2 feet wide.
> OK? The 'road' was 2 feet wide. It was a Packhorse Road. A 'road' built for pack horses. not for any wheeled vehicle.
> Down the causeway it was a stony track, about 6 feet wide at the time, but I'm certain that it too was once a 2 foot wide line of slabs.
>

>

As I understand it, the flagged path through the Plantation is an ancient packhorse trail. The Long Causeway is much more recent (c1800s at a guess) and was designed to get carts up and over to Sheffield (inc salt from Cheshire) so has always been around 6' wide. It used to have a surface of small gritstone cobbles but that has all gone.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: You make a good point about the danger to others but the erosion issue is all shades of grey and where you care to draw the line. Usually just behind your group. I am no different but as a biker as well as climber I would ban vehicles with engines but not pushbikes. So the motocrossers will see it differently and so on. Sorry if I am stating the obvious but you cannot deny that climbing has a detrimental effect on the crag environment and I suppose you can only justify that with an argument for the recreational value of climbing (as measured by climbers) outweighing the damage done.

In reply to UKC News: I would call myself a mountain biker: I own a mountain bike and use it semi-regulary, and am not totally incompetant, got round some trail centres and even been on a skills course. However I am surprised to learn the Causeway ascent or descent appears to be so high up on peoples list of enjoyable trails. For me it is a bone jarring experience, which inevitably results in a bit of pushing to get past the worst hacked up sections. As someone who mainly wants a decent continous route than technical difficulty, improving the rideability will open up many more options from Sheffield, including ascending back that way. Also, it is part of the transport network, providing an off-road(!) route from the west of Sheffield to Hathersage, and is used in this guise for a range of reasons, shopping, social vists, trips to the pool, accessing crags etc.

If we were talking about some amazing flowing famous moutain bike descent I would maybe be more bothered, but I see at as very minor thrill in the whole context of what the peak offers a mountain biker (it is not even that steep), so broadly support the work, with the caveat that the 4x4 crowd aren't allowed back on to wreck it again, starting a costly never ending loop.

> (In reply to UKC News)
>
> I was up there on Sunday and the work does look pretty rubbish at the moment, however I think the vegetation should encroach back onto the track and a few years down the line it might not look too bad providing the 4x4s are kept off.
>
> Alan

Why should 4x4s be kept of it ? they have just as much right to use it as anyone else.. Keep bikers of it, cause ruts, Keep walkers and climbers of it, drop rubbish, crap everywhere and leave toilet roll all over the place, Stop dog walkers they throw bags of crap everywhere...

> (In reply to Fredt)
> [...]
>
> The Long Causeway is much more recent (c1800s at a guess) and was designed to get carts up and over to Sheffield (inc salt from Cheshire) so has always been around 6' wide. It used to have a surface of small gritstone cobbles but that has all gone.

Lots of other people, including archeologists have a much earlier date, how accurate is this guess of yours?

> (In reply to cheese@4p)
>
> Just as soon as hikers and climbers start making a filthy row, mowing down other pedestrians and causing the sort of erosion we can see on the Stanage Causeway and elsewhere, I agree.
>
> jcm

Oh, is it time to post a link to the aerial shots of all the footpath erosion by walkers again?

..as a walker, climber and environmentalist I object to this urbanisation of the countryside, and about something which may well increase both the volume and speed of motorised vehicles through it.

Well put.

On a common sense level this just looks like an incredible waste of money. It's hard to see any group that benefit and easy to see many who are negatively effected. If maintenance is needed it should be bare minimum.

As for the rights of 4x4 drivers and motorcyclists in national parks, your pleasure has a hugely disproportionally negative impact on the pleasure of other users - through noise, fumes and displacement by your size and speed. Similarly your environmental impact. Unlike other users, you gain little or no health benefits from your hobby. You are in a totally different category and should be banned.

In reply to woolsack: "I know that this goes against the grain on UKC, I agree with you. Those pictures change my opinion on whether there should be a TRO in place on the Causeway. That has deteriorated a great deal since I last saw it. It's trashed now.

The whole point of greenlaning should be treading lightly, evidently that isn't the case there."

If the causeway is adopted highway and responsibility of the local authority then they have a duty under the highways act to maintain it in a safe and fit for use condition ie. passable to traffic. If it's not adopted highway then DCC would have no obligation to maintain it.

If the authority have a duty to maintain then they would seek the best whole life cost solution to fulfil this obligation within the constraints of environmental protection legislation. This may well be undesirable for the various lobby and user groups but the duty to maintain is in statute law whereas what constitutes an "appropriate" solution is rather subjective.

In reply to Sir Chasm: I actually think a 12 month voluntary ban on 4x4's on the Causeway may not be a bad thing. That would be 12 months for the drainage issues and revetments to prove if it is 4x4 traffic that is responsible for trashing the surface

In reply to Papillon: It is a waste of tax payers money which benefits nobody and reduces recreational value, but it is designated a road so it is just one of those things and a logical decision, get over it etc.It is a sad beurocratic world in which you want to live.

In reply to UKC News: Shame from mtb point of view but the descent down the slabs and through the plantation is far better anyway, as long as there are no people blocking the way (I tend to do it very early on summer mornings).

DCC recently resurfaced the Chapel Gate track too, which also spoiled some fun. I do think some sort of meeting of minds is needed, as liaison between Ride Sheffield and Sheffield CC has worked wonders, in only a short time frame, over on the civilized side of the county boundary. same approach needed here I think, to find a solution that provides an acceptable compromise for all.

> (In reply to UKC News) Mountain bikers, just like rock climbers want interesting and challenging routes. These are in limited supply and the continued sanitisation of bridleways is seen as a very negative trend. Surely as climbers you can appreciate that challenging terrain has intrinsic value?

This isn't 'challenging terrain', it's a byway. It's like complaining the council has filled in the potholes in the pavement and you can't enjoy youself on your bike anymore.

This is just the kind of discussion that DCC should have sought before starting the recent work on the Causeway.

Perhaps this particular "fight" isn't that important in terms how it affects the enjoyment of any particular individual or group. Whether you like what's been done so far or not, you need to ask the question, "Would you be happy seeing the new surface continue up to Stanage Pole?", which is where DCC's responsibility ends and Sheffield CC starts. If DCC have a legal duty to fill in the potholes and ruts on their stretch of the Causeway, then they will ultimately be obliged to do this up to the Pole because if they don't, someone will no doubt make more threats of legal action to force their hand. On the "If you build it, they will come" principle, should we then expect to see people driving their cars along the top to the Pole for family days out. It's not such a big leap of the imagination. Before the gate went up at the Redmires end, it was not uncommon to see one or two cars parked up the track by the gate into the plantation.

The (possibly sad) reality is that the Peak District's upland areas cannot support recreational off-roading in motorised vehicles without the character of those areas being changed.

Perhaps DCC's efforts should be going into obtaining a TRO to exclude motorised vehicles from the Causeway. Then they wouldn't need to spend a lot of money doing work which many people don't like and some claim will be washed away in a few years time, necessitating the surface being renewed again (and again) until eventually they just 'black top' it.

Is it beyond the wit of man to change the designation of the causeway from a BOAT to something else like a bridleway?
The 4X4 lot are always going on about the legal rights they have and they're absolutely correct. But in places like this where the right is really only a historical anomaly the right should be removed.

Always people want to ban "the other", whilst indulging in special pleading for their own chosen passtimes. We who use the countryside for pleasure cause damage to it, to varying degrees, and have no moral argument to stop others doing so.

I'm not sure where anyone has said there is 'no difference' - can you point that out?

It's just a totally untenable position to say 'well the damage to the countryside that I do with my hoses activity is absolutely fine, but ban everyone else'. I have mixed feelings about 4x4s etc too, but walkers/climbers moaning about mountain bike erosion is a bit rich.

There is massive erosion all over the Lakes in places you'll never see a mountain bike, let alone a 4x4 or trail bike. But that's fine of course.

As mentioned earlier, there is a certain amount of hipocrisy from some regarding 4x4's, as many are quite happy to take mountain bikes on footpaths and trods, which causes deep irreversible rutting and destruction.

In reply to grumsta: Well, there's always one. Is the point that you are completely unable to differentiate between the amount of erosion caused by one walker in a pair of boots versus one fat knacker in a 4x4er?

> (In reply to Hirosim)
>
> Unlike the hypocrisy of walkers/climbers then, who ride on a magic carpet of air and cause no erosion.

No, but many small paths/trods and stayed at a level for the past 20 years. The increase in MTB using them especially when wet, does increase the erosion hugely. You get deep ruts, which fill with and retain water, and compound the problem. When they get so boggy, MTB' start making a new line around them. Having walked on these paths for over 30 years, I have seen a massive increase in damage on the past 3/4 years which is down to MTB.
For the record I have no problem with MTB's being one myself. I do however find this selfish trashing of little paths for short term personal fun is very upsetting though.

Ah so we're back to 'the erosion I cause is fine, it's the erosion other people cause that the problem'. Yes I can see the difference, and I already said I have mixed feelings about 4x4s, you just would think other countryside users who also cause large amounts of erosion might have a slight sense of perspective and tone down the self-righteous hysterical wailing slightly.

Some MTBers are nobs who pay no attention to ground conditions, so are some walkers/climbers and 4x4 drivers. I think claiming that footpath erosion was under control before MTBers came along is pushing it quite a bit though.

> (In reply to grumsta)
> [...]
>
> No, but many small paths/trods and stayed at a level for the past 20 years. The increase in MTB using them especially when wet, does increase the erosion hugely. You get deep ruts, which fill with and retain water, and compound the problem. When they get so boggy, MTB' start making a new line around them. Having walked on these paths for over 30 years, I have seen a massive increase in damage on the past 3/4 years which is down to MTB.
> For the record I have no problem with MTB's being one myself. I do however find this selfish trashing of little paths for short term personal fun is very upsetting though.

Various studies on erosion have shown that there is no significant difference between that caused by mtbs and walkers. The ruts you refer to will collect water in some places, but in others will cause the water to drain off. Are walkers less likely than bikers to go around a boggy section - I'd say the opposite is true. And if you've been walking for 30 years who'll be aware that all outdoor activities have become much more popular in that time.

However, whilst we all cause some erosion/visual impact/disturbance of nature in our leisure pursuits, obviously some activities do more than others. A horse does far more damage to a track than an MTB, which is why putting them in the same category is daft. And with motorised vehicles, being both heavier and more powerful, the damage increases exponentially.

Somewhere you have to draw the line between preserving the countryside as it was before humans- no footpaths, trees everywhere - and a free for all - I'm sure some climbers would like to able to drive their 4x4s to the base of the crag!

For me that line is simple, human powered is good, petrol powered bad !

> (In reply to Sir Chasm)
>
> It's just a totally untenable position to say 'well the damage to the countryside that I do with my hoses activity is absolutely fine, but ban everyone else'. I have mixed feelings about 4x4s etc too, but walkers/climbers moaning about mountain bike erosion is a bit rich.
>

I have mixed feelings about MTBs (I do a bit of XC riding myself). The damage is clearly visible but then in the right area it's worth maintaining trails.

No mixed feelings about trail bikes or 4x4. The scale of the damage one of these can do is orders of magnitude above that of non-motorised countryside users, then there's the noise. It's a no-brainer.

> (In reply to Hirosim)
> [...]
>
> Various studies on erosion have shown that there is no significant difference between that caused by mtbs and walkers. The ruts you refer to will collect water in some places, but in others will cause the water to drain off. Are walkers less likely than bikers to go around a boggy section - I'd say the opposite is true. And if you've been walking for 30 years who'll be aware that all outdoor activities have become much more popular in that time.
>

Most of those studies were done on 'trails' and aren't relevant to the Peaks.
They are also not pertinent to wet peak trods which do get really messed up and damaged by MTBs.
Also some of these studies do show an increase in impact anyways.
Also I have never encountered a horse rider on a peak trod. I have encountered plenty of MTB's.
The damage is pretty significant.

> (In reply to Chris the Tall)
>
> [...]
>
> And where do horses fit in the great scheme of things?

Somewhere in the middle. I've really noticed their impact with the wet weather last year, but at the same time I recognise that horse owners don't have the option to leave their steeds untouched in the cellar for a couple of months !

> Various studies on erosion have shown that there is no significant difference between that caused by mtbs and walkers.

With regard to the Peak District, you don't have to do any studies to see the impact of mountain bikes. The bridleway that went from the bridge by the layby on the A57 up towards Derwent Edge used to be a nice grassy rise 10 years ago, but is now a messy quagmire of ruts and bogs chewed up by bikes.

I also notice that the path from the Plantation carpark up to Stanage Plantation has well and truly blossomed from its single stone steps and a muddy nightmare has appeared to both sides in places as a result of bikes which suddenly seem to have discovered this little gem of a path. Certainly wasn't like this a few years ago.

There was a time when walking some bridleways when you wouldn't see anyone else other than walkers. Now, if you don't see 20+ bikers it is a quiet day.

This isn't an anti bike rant, but I have noticed that as a significant impact in the Peak on bridleways that have become uber popular in the last few years.

How do they compare to the 4x4 damage on shatton, houndkirk , redmires or totley moss ?

Or the walkers damage around kinder and the rest of the pennine way.

I'll help you out - Whinstone lee tor is an embarrassment to MTBers, although walkers are just as culpable, but the VB guide which features it also includes a warning about ethics. Furthermore most people know to only ride it in dry conditions, and you frequently see posts to that effect on forums like singletrackworld

> There was a time when walking some bridleways when you wouldn't see anyone else other than walkers. Now, if you don't see 20+ bikers it is a quiet day.
>
> This isn't an anti bike rant, but I have noticed that as a significant impact in the Peak on bridleways that have become uber popular in the last few years.

A week last Saturday was described on here as "the busiest day on Stanage popular ever". I don't doubt it, but I dread to think of how many climbers had parked on the verges that day. And I'm sure that Whinestone lee tor (the a57 BW you referred to) would have been busy too.

But I'd gone over to the other side of the peak, did 37 miles of brilliant MTBing, and saw a grand total of 8 other MTBs all day.

Just remember that when you are in a traffic jam, you are as much to blame as everyone else.

> (In reply to Chris the Tall)
>
> [...]
>
> With regard to the Peak District, you don't have to do any studies to see the impact of mountain bikes. The bridleway that went from the bridge by the layby on the A57 up towards Derwent Edge used to be a nice grassy rise 10 years ago, but is now a messy quagmire of ruts and bogs chewed up by bikes.
>
> I also notice that the path from the Plantation carpark up to Stanage Plantation has well and truly blossomed from its single stone steps and a muddy nightmare has appeared to both sides in places as a result of bikes which suddenly seem to have discovered this little gem of a path. Certainly wasn't like this a few years ago.
>
> There was a time when walking some bridleways when you wouldn't see anyone else other than walkers. Now, if you don't see 20+ bikers it is a quiet day.
>
> This isn't an anti bike rant, but I have noticed that as a significant impact in the Peak on bridleways that have become uber popular in the last few years.

I completely agree. Unfortunately there are now many 'footpaths' getting the same treatment.

> Just remember that when you are in a traffic jam, you are as much to blame as everyone else.

I completely agree. However, there are solutions to some problems whilst others are more complex. I remember being dragged across the most horrendous (walker created) bogs as a kid in the 80's. Revisiting many of these hotspots in recent years, I note a large programme of path building has been largely successful. I do wonder what the solution to erosion created by mountain bikes will be though since I guess a descent of ruts and mud jumps is what you are seeking? To pave such areas one way or other would surely just encourage bikers to go wide?

As has been stated above, half the fun of the causeway was the ruts and bumps. Now that it will be gravelled over, it kind of defeats the point even if it will now be feasible to walk up this track rather than being confined to the edges.

In reply to UKC News: an in the mists of all this (very British) finger pointing, blame game. Has anyone considered how we could fix the issue for all.

One way or another erosion will happen where we step or ride, and all this green will slowly fade.

So what can we do?

Is it time to plant some grass seeds and turn some soil, or maybe just have time out every now and then, dare I say have a temporary ban on paths/crags/areas to encourage regeneration in the area.

The Country Side is there for us all to use and we can all choose how. Maybe Designated "green lanes" for cycle paths like the tiny areas they allow you to cycle near the grand canyon south rim, or on and off seasons for crags and or paths(not just when its too cold for most or bird are nesting).

Just my tuppence but all ideas are welcome. I just feel we are currently acting like children fist let out into the garden and we could be making a mess maybe we should act like grown ups and tend to our garden.

I fear the day I take my kids to somewhere like Burbage and say I used to climb here, and they respond "Its a bit of a dump isn't it dad?".